I have one final thought before I leave this question and go to the next. What about Jesus? If he is who he said he was, does not he offer not only proof, but an understanding of the God of the universe. Most specifically, he is not just proof of God, but is God in the flesh.
Now I know what some are going to say. Where is the proof that he was God? True, it was recorded in the Bible, but I know some may not believe the Bible is reliable (see question concerning the Bible's authenticity). But let's suppose for a moment that I have proved to you that the Bible is trustworthy and that it meets all of the external and internal criteria needed to be a historically reliable document of antiquity. Knowing what you know about the need for a self-existent being, and also knowing that the Bible is authentic and thus records the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, who claims to be God, would not these two criteria answer one's question to the existence of God? Give it some thought!
I want to end by asking: If you are wanting proof for the existence of God, what kind of proof are you looking for? Are you open to the type of proof you claim to need? I know some who have said that if God would just perform a miracle, they would believe. My fear is that if he were to do some miracle in front of them that they would just rationalize it away. So how open are you to the truth that there is a God who is personal and one in whom not just created us, but also is the one in whom we are held accountable?
No comments:
Post a Comment